Though only loosely related to the 1960s TV show, the first three Mission: Impossible films have made a whole lot of money for the studio. Starring Tom Cruise, the first two made a billion dollars combined. The third didn’t make as much which is why it’s been four years before there’s talk of making another one.

Last February, it was reported that a fourth Mission: Impossible movie was in the works. Initially, it sounded like a run-of-the-mill sequel but now it looks like it may be a reboot of sorts. In fact, it won’t be called Mission: Impossible IV and may not have Mission: Impossible in the title at all, ala the Batman sequel The Dark Knight.

According to Variety, numerous changes are being made to hold down the studio’s upfront costs.

While past films have shown Ethan Hunt (Cruise) working with a team of agents, the fourth installment will team Hunt with one other agent, played by Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker). The studio is reportedly hoping that Cruise will be part of future films but if things go well, Renner’s character will become the main focus. A key factor in past budgets has been Cruise’s substantial salary.

The fourth Mission: Impossible movie is set to begin production in the fall. Shooting will take place in the United States, Vancouver, Prague, and Dubai. This will be the first live-action feature film for director Brad Bird (Iron Giant, The Incredibles).

What do you think? Do you enjoy the Mission: Impossible movies? Do you think shaking up the format is a good idea?

People may not know who Jeremy Renner is just yet, but this movie is scheduled to come out in December of 2011. By then Renner will have been in The Town (Already being talked about as best movie of the year) and The Avengers which should be great. The goal is to get someone that is peaking when the movie comes out, rather than someone who just made a bomb with Cameron Diaz playing, you guessed it, a spy. I will note that I am a Tom Cruise fan and loved the first 3 that he was in, but I… Read more »

THIS MOVIE WILL SUCK. Too many reasons to list. Stand up to Hollywood. Make them do more than re-microwave warm poop. It’s our nine dollars. Have a voice and make Paramount Pictures and other major studios stop making movies for a profit and start making movies for “TRUE” entertainment. True values. Classics.

Like other people wrote before me, putting TOM CRUISE in the back seat is not a very good idea. i think JEREMY RENNER should have the role of the “bad guy” because they need a talented actor (which i think he is) to stand up to Cruise’s performance (which will be great, as always). But MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT: TOM is the star of Mission Impossible and should continue to be so. As for Shelly (i bet you are another one of those Pattinson/Lautner/Twilight freaks), you should stop talking about real actors if you don’t really have anything intelligent… Read more »

Vote Up00Vote Down Reply

August 31, 2010 11:59 pm

Reader

Chris

Shelly, if you got the looks of a thirty-something when you are in fact hitting your fifties then you are entitled to act accordingly. It sounds like you got merely a problem with your enviousness than with the person itself. And THAT is what is really embarrassing here 😉
No one under 30… LOLZ!

Vote Up00Vote Down Reply

August 31, 2010 8:47 am

Reader

Sean

Shelly you are a genious. I am 23 and Tom Cruise is my favorite actor. My friends and I who all are in are twenties have been seeing Tom Cruise movies for years he is in the best action movies so to say people under 30 do not know him as an actor is dumb. Replacing Cruise with Jeremy Renner would also be about as dumb as shelly’s statement. He did the hurt locker which was critically acclaimed, but guess what no one really saw it. Are you telling me they are going to replace one of the most well… Read more »

Vote Up00Vote Down Reply

August 31, 2010 7:55 am

Reader

Shelly

No one under 30 knows who Tom Cruise is other than that he’s some insane Scientology dude who jumps on Oprah’s couch and tries to act 20 when he’s 50. It’s embarassing. It’s like watching your parents try to act 20, they just can’t. Oh yeah, and the the only reason I’m even talking about Tom Cruise is that my MOM has an autographed photo of him from when she was a kid. Gag. New actor already. Please.

That would be pretty stupid to replace Cruise’s character. He is the reason to go see this…

Vote Up00Vote Down Reply

August 30, 2010 8:25 pm

Reader

jim

put mission: impossible in the title. no one is going to yell at you

Vote Up00Vote Down Reply

August 30, 2010 1:35 pm

Reader

Jeremy Rynek

No I don’t think so. I really don’t think putting the focus on some other guy is gonna make the loyal mission impossible happy at all. Don’t get me wrong Jeremy Renner is a good actor, but him taking over the main character, yeah that’s not gonna work. If the studio wants to see Renner in the a movie, then do a different movie maybe a spin off movie. But do NOT have Jeremy Renner take over Tom’s role. That will be a death wish. But your call.